Friday, February 28, 2014

President Barack Obama on Friday issued a blunt and direct warning to Russian President Vladimir Putin: stay out of Ukraine.
If not, he said, there will be consequences — though he didn’t say what those might be.
“We are now deeply concerned by reports of military movements taken by the Russian Federation inside of Ukraine,” Obama said, speaking at the White House. “Any violation of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity would be deeply destabilizing.”
As a first sign of where things could go next, a senior administration official said the president is considering scrapping a planned trip to the G-8 summit to be held in Sochi in June. In September, he canceled a planned summit with Putin that would have been held as part of his trip to Russia for the G-20 conference.
“We are consulting with European partners and considering options,” the official said. “It is hard to see how we and other European leaders would attend the G-8 in Sochi if Russia is intervening in Ukraine.”~snip~

So basically he's threatening to deprive them of his presence. Congratulations liberal/commie media, this is the milquetoast wussy you sold the world on.

On top of the fact that businesses can be penalized for not wanting to participate in ceremonies that violate their religious beliefs a court has ruled that schools can ban T-shirts with American flags worn by students.
A nice analysis can be found here:

Today’s Dariano v. Morgan Hill Unified School Dist. (9th Cir. Feb. 27, 2014) upholds a California high school’s decision to forbid students from wearing American flag T-shirts on Cinco de Mayo. (See here and here for more on this case.)The court points out that the rights of students in public high schools are limited — under the Supreme Court’s decision in Tinker v. Des Moines Indep. Comm. School Dist. (1969), student speech could be restricted if “school authorities [can reasonably] forecast substantial disruption of or material interference with school activities” stemming from the speech. And on the facts of this case, the court concludes, there was reason to think that the wearing of the T-shirts would lead to disruption. There had been threats of racial violence aimed at students who wore such shirts the year before:

On Cinco de Mayo in 2009, a year before the events relevant to this appeal, there was an altercation on campus between a group of predominantly Caucasian students and a group of Mexican students. The groups exchanged profanities and threats. Some students hung a makeshift American flag on one of the trees on campus, and as they did, the group of Caucasian students began clapping and chanting “USA.” A group of Mexican students had been walking around with the Mexican flag, and in response to the white students’ flag-raising, one Mexican student shouted “f*** them white boys, f*** them white boys.” When Assistant Principal Miguel Rodriguez told the student to stop using profane language, the student said, “But Rodriguez, they are racist. They are being racist. F*** them white boys. Let’s f*** them up.” Rodriguez removed the student from the area….At least one party to this appeal, student M.D., wore American flag clothing to school on Cinco de Mayo 2009. M.D. was approached by a male student who, in the words of the district court, “shoved a Mexican flag at him and said something in Spanish expressing anger at [M.D.’s] clothing.~snip~

Public schools receive public and federal money and as such can be considered extensions of the federal government so the rights under the constitution should apply. With threats of violence made it seems somewhat obvious that the easiest thing to do would be to give in to what in essence are terrorists and ban the shirts.
It seems like as a country we are giving in to terroristic threats more than trying to protect and respect the speech of all citizens thus rewarding those who use violence or threats of violence to silence others.
Strangely enough this is a commie/liberal tactic that keeps being used because we have allowed it to become so successful....that needs to change.

Thursday, February 27, 2014

After all the gnashing of teeth and hysterical hyperbole over a proposed law in Arizona designed to protect religious liberty in Arizona it's no surprise that Gov. Jan Brewer vetoed it.
Of course the media calling it "anti-gay" was all the red meat the pink mafia needed to begin foaming at the mouth and the sending of death threats

PHOENIX — Ending a day that cast a glaring national spotlight on Arizona, Gov. Jan Brewer, a Republican, vetoed a bill on Wednesday that would have given business owners the right to refuse service to gay men, lesbians and other people on religious grounds.
Her action came amid mounting pressure from Arizona business leaders, who said the bill would be a financial disaster for the state and would harm its reputation. Prominent members of the Republican establishment, including Mitt Romney and Gov. Rick Scott of Florida, also sided with the bill’s opponents, who argued that the measure would have allowed people to use religion as a fig leaf for prejudice.
Federal Judge Strikes Down Texas’ Ban on Same-Sex MarriageFEB. 26, 2014
Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. in his office on Monday, when he spoke about the defense of states’ same-sex marriage bans.Holder Sees Way to Curb Bans on Gay Marriage FEB. 24, 2014
Ms. Brewer announced her veto at a hastily called news conference after spending the day holed up in the Capitol in private meetings with opponents and supporters. “I call them like I see them, despite the cheers or the boos from the crowd,” she said. She added that the legislation “does not address a specific or present concern related to religious liberty in Arizona,” and that it was “broadly worded and could result in unintended and negative consequences.”~snip~

No media bias there of course
The NFL also had to get involved, big paragons of morality and decency that they are.
In essence it's pretty much open season on religious beliefs which,weirdly enough, impeding the free exercise of is specifically spelled out in the constitution.
As hard as it is for people to believe adhering to ones religion is a life style choice and those who insist that their choices be respected and protected by government over any others is just a little hypocritical.
But it looks like some politicians haven't given up on religious freedom yet.

Tuesday, February 25, 2014

Lena Dunham snared her first Saturday Night Live hosting gig at the best possible time. Her HBO series Girls could sure use a PR boost.The media long ago declared Girls the Next Great Television Series without noticing how few people actually watch it. Scribes were equally effusive about Dunham despite a thin track record.Dunham's "breakout" film, the 2010 indie dramedy Tiny Furniture, barely registered on the pop culture radar The 2012 feature Nobody Walks, which she co-wrote, earned a grand total of $25,342 during its brief theatrical window.Now, the audience for Girls in season 3 continues to shrink while HBO's new series True Detective manages to add viewers each week.~snip~

Funny story, I'm a DISH subscriber, basic channels because I live far enough out that antenna viewing is pretty impossible and also so I can watch the NFL.
I actually saw an ad where DISH was advertising "Girls" as a reason to subscribe to HBO. Now I realize that I'm outside of the viewer demographic (which is odd because I've subscribed to DISH for a few years and pay my bill on time, you would think that would be a demographic worth selling to) but it seems to me that if they want more subscribers they would advertise with stronger shows.
Or maybe they were just pandering to the commie/liberal media.
Suffice it to say that I won't be subscribing to HBO based on that recommendation.

Former Vice President Dick Cheney said Monday that Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel’s proposed drastic cuts to the U.S. Army are “absolutely dangerous" and would cause long-term damage to the military.Cheney told Fox News’ Sean Hannity the proposed cuts, which would shrink the Army to its smallest size since just before the U.S. entered World War II, would have a devastating impact on the ability of future presidents to deal with future crises.“This is really over the top,” Cheney said. “It does enormous long-term damage to our military.”The Army had already been preparing to shrink to 490,000 active-duty members from a wartime peak of 570,000. Hagel is proposing to cut it further to between 440,000 and 450,000."We are repositioning to focus on the strategic challenges and opportunities that will define our future: new technologies, new centers of power, and a world that is growing more volatile, more unpredictable, and in some instances more threatening to the United States," Hagel said at a press conference at the Pentagon.He defended the proposed reductions in troop strength, as a trade-off for building up "technological superiority" and priorities like Special Operations Forces and "cyber resources."~snip~

There may be some merit for us to be more observers in the world than active participants in other countries policies. Until other countries decide to force their policies on us.
But can we really afford to play catch up a second time in history and can we afford to hope for the same outcome again?

She may not look anywhere near her 76 years but Jane Fonda says she is well aware of her age.The Hollywood legend – who has made her career in an industry which isn't exactly kind to aging actresses - admits she has been brought to tears on more than one occasion recently as she comes to terms with her own mortality.In a thoughtful blog post entitled 'Crying', which has since been removed, Jane wrote: '[I've been thinking], how come my tears are so close to the surface? And I’ve come to feel it has to do with age. I have become so wonderfully, terribly aware of time, of how little of it I have left; how much of it is behind me, and everything becomes so precious (sic).'~snip~

Regrets are something we all have through life and as I'm getting older they've pretty well piled up but like most everyone else in the world I'm aware of my own mortality and realize the inevitability of my future.
We had a choice in life to live it well or to squander the time we've been given. When my time comes I don't plan to quietly go in the night but I also don't plan on blubbering about opportunities lost.
Life is a crap shoot and I have nothing to be ashamed of when I stand to be accountable, only those who have no explanations for their behavior have anything to fear.

Saturday, February 22, 2014

....is never a good idea. Mostly because the majority of the commie/liberal press is already doing propaganda for the liberal democrats. For the most part I'm sure the study will just verify what most Americans know already, that most major news outlets follow the party line.

The First Amendment says "Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press…" But under the Obama administration, the Federal Communications Commission is planning to send government contractors into the nation's newsrooms to determine whether journalists are producing articles, television reports, Internet content, and commentary that meets the public's "critical information needs." Those "needs" will be defined by the administration, and news outlets that do not comply with the government's standards could face an uncertain future. It's hard to imagine a project more at odds with the First Amendment.The initiative, known around the agency as "the CIN Study" (pronounced "sin"), is a bit of a mystery even to insiders. "This has never been put to an FCC vote, it was just announced," says Ajit Pai, one of the FCC's five commissioners (and one of its two Republicans). "I've never had any input into the process," adds Pai, who brought the story to the public's attention in a Wall Street Journal column last week.Advocates promote the project with Obama-esque rhetoric. "This study begins the charting of a course to a more effective delivery of necessary information to all citizens," said FCC commissioner Mignon Clyburn in 2012. Clyburn, daughter of powerful House Democratic Rep. James Clyburn, was appointed to the FCC by President Obama and served as acting chair for part of last year. The FCC, Clyburn said, "must emphatically insist that we leave no American behind when it comes to meeting the needs of those in varied and vibrant communities of our nation -- be they native born, immigrant, disabled, non-English speaking, low-income, or other." (The FCC decided to test the program with a trial run in Ms. Clyburn's home state, South Carolina.)The FCC commissioned the University of Southern California Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism and the University of Wisconsin-Madison Center for Communication and Democracy to do a study defining what information is "critical" for citizens to have. The scholars decided that "critical information" is information that people need to "live safe and healthy lives" and to "have full access to educational, employment, and business opportunities," among other things.The study identified eight "critical needs": information about emergencies and risks; health and welfare; education; transportation; economic opportunities; the environment; civic information; and political information.~snip~

Of course the best way to make sure that the news follows the party line is to involve commie and liberal infested universities and their socialist journalism departments to insure the proper thoughts are being disseminated.
How Orwellian of them.
If I were of a conspiratorial bent the first thought that would have come to my mind is that the Obama administration kinda suggested this to the FCC in order to silence FOX news and conservative radio.
Obama wouldn't play dirty politics or lie to us....would he?
The democrats have control of the majority of the media and now are basically so emboldened by conservatives inability to counter them that they don't even try to hide it any more.

It's certainly an ironic situation that while Venezuela and Ukraine are in flames because people are fighting for their rights we have politicians here that threaten our right to disagree with them using the power of licensing to silence dissent.

While Julie Boonstra of Dexter, Mich., struggles to survive leukemia, she now also has to cope with being called a liar by the Democrat who wants to be her next senator.And the campaign of Rep. Gary Peters is also going after television stations airing ads in which her story is featured, threatening their licenses.The ad by Americans for Prosperity features Boonstra talking about how her insurance was canceled under Obamacare and saying that Peters' decision to vote for the law "jeopardized my health." The ads are airing in Michigan as Peters seeks the Democratic nomination to replace Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., who is not seeking re-election.Media organizations investigating the ad's claims note that Boonstra was able to find comparable new insurance under the law; the Washington Post's "Fact Checker" blog gave the ad "two Pinocchios" (as compared to four for President Obama's claim that people could keep their insurance under the law).But Boonstra, in response, told the local Dexter Leader newspaper that though she has no idea whether she will break even with her new plan, as the fact-checkers claim, the uncertainty of having to restructure her health care while coping with a deadly disease is damage enough."People are asking me for the numbers and I don't know those answers -- that's the heartbreak of all of this. It's the uncertainty of not having those numbers that I have an issue with, because I always knew what I was paying and now I don't, and I haven't gone through the tests or seen my specialist yet," she said.~snip~

No matter what the fact checkers say the bottom line is that Julia Boonstra has her reasons for disliking the plan she has been forced into and has no other alternative because of Obamacare. This is a basic fact that the democrats seem to want to constantly ignore while trying to sell the public on why they are better off now.
So now she's not only lost the freedom of determining what kind of health plan is better for her but could potentially lose the ability to speak out about it.

Tuesday, February 18, 2014

Given a chance to do it all over again, only 79 percent of those who voted for President Obama would vote for him again and 71 percent of Obama voters now inclined to vote for somebody else “regret” their vote to reelect the president, according to a new poll.The Economist/YouGov.com poll found that Obama would lose enough votes in a rematch with Mitt Romney that the Republican would win. “90 percent of people who voted for Romney would do it again, compared to only 79 percent of Obama voters who would,” said the poll.~snip~

There were plenty of warnings before hand but of course it didn't dawn on people that their poor choice could affect them until it did. The health insurance market is in complete disarray since the roll out of Obamacare but the real pain has yet to arrive since the administration keeps delaying portions of the law to save the asses of democrats coming up for reelection later this year.

Along the way voters are starting to realize the damage done to the middle class and other working Americans.

(CNSNews.com) - What do you think is the most important problem facing this country today?In response to that question posed by the Gallup polling organization earlier this month, 23 percent of Americans said unemployment/jobs are the most important problem, up from 16 percent in January.The response cut across party lines, with Republicans, Democrats and Independents all choosing unemployment/jobs as the nation's most pressing problem in February.Next on the list, 20 percent of Americans said the "economy in general" is the nation's most important problem, followed by dissatisfaction with government (19 percent); poor healthcare/hospitals-high cost of healthcare (15 percent); federal budget deficit/debt (8 percent); immigration/illegal aliens (6 percent); ethics-morals-family decline (5 percent); and education (4 percent).~snip~

Romney wasn't my first choice for the republican nomination but if he had won he wouldn't be purposely trying to destroy the middle class,jobs or the economy.
Lets hope we can turn our regrets around this year and in 2016.

Saturday, February 15, 2014

Chattanooga, Tenn. (February 14, 2014) — Volkswagen Chattanooga employees have voted in a secret ballot election against United Auto Workers (UAW) representation. Participation in the election was 89 percent. 53 percent of the eligible employees who voted decided against the UAW as their bargaining representative in an election conducted by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) between February 12 – 14.“On behalf of Volkswagen Group of America, I want to thank all of our Chattanooga production and maintenance employees for their participation in this week's vote. They have spoken, and Volkswagen will respect the decision of the majority,” said Frank Fischer, CEO and Chairman of Volkswagen Chattanooga. “The election results remain to be certified by the NLRB,” Fischer, said.“Our employees have not made a decision that they are against a works council. Throughout this process, we found great enthusiasm for the idea of an American-style works council both inside and outside our plant,” Fischer noted. “Our goal continues to be to determine the best method for establishing a works council in accordance with the requirements of U.S. labor law to meet VW America's production needs and serve our employees’ interests,” Fischer said.~snip~

While the media spin on this heavily favors the union position the real story is the repudiation of union policies by workers who are more interested in their livelihood than allowing their dues to be used to support politicians who work against the interests of the middle class.
The failure of unions in this country is due to their complete disconnect from middle class values.

Thursday, February 13, 2014

Even though this ad targets Mary Landrieu's (D-LA) it should be a reminder from now until November that Obama and the democrats policies are hurting families and will continue to do so after the election.
There is no doubt that healthcare needs reforming, but Obamacare is not the way,
We need to send that message loud and clear when we go to the ballot box.

Wednesday, February 12, 2014

Wendy Davis said Tuesday that she would have supported a ban on abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, if the law adequately deferred to a woman and her doctor.Davis, a Fort Worth senator and the likely Democratic nominee for governor, told The Dallas Morning News’ editorial board that less than one-half of 1 percent of Texas abortions occur after 20 weeks of pregnancy. Most of those were in cases where fetal abnormalities were evident or there were grave risks to the health of the woman.“I would line up with most people in Texas who would prefer that that’s not something that happens outside of those two arenas,” Davis said.But the Democrat said the state’s new abortion law didn’t give priority to women in those circumstances. The law allows for exceptions for fetal abnormalities and a threat to the woman’s life, but Davis said those didn’t go far enough.~snip~

This seems to be recurring theme with democrats, this from the woman who couldn't even be truthful about her past. Modifying it to play to a particular demographic of women who see themselves more as victims.Supporting open carry because...well it's Texas and now modifying her position on the 20 week abortion ban after pandering to the minority planned parenthood demographic that put her name on the map.
To many politicians ride the wave of fringe political beliefs to get themselves noticed long enough to throw the very principal they championed under the bus once they get publicity and money from the issue.

If presenting herself as the polar opposite of what she initially stood for will get her elected then she will misrepresent herself that way. Like any other democrat.
Voters need to stop falling for it.

Tuesday, February 11, 2014

SOCHI, February 11, 2014 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A member of the American luge team in Sochi is furious over an ad produced by a Canadian homosexual advocacy group, saying the attempt to portray doubles luging as sexually suggestive in order to promote "gay rights" is “ridiculous” and “sad.”The 33-second video, produced by the Canadian Institute of Diversity and Inclusion (CIDI), features two figures sitting on a luge sled and swaying back and forth suggestively to music with the lyrics "Don't you want me baby.”The ad ends with the tagline: “The Games have always been a little gay. Let’s fight to keep them that way.”~snip~

Again we have another attempt to project "gayness" onto something totally unrelated to the agenda in order to ....what?
There's some kind of desperate reach by homosexual activists to find sex everywhere they look and highlight it to the world, to constantly throw homosexuality into the face of everyone they can.
It seems to be the only way they can see the world, is through their own obsessive pink colored glasses.

Two members of Congress will reportedly send a letter to National Football League Commissioner Roger Goodell Monday calling for the league to put pressure on the Washington Redskins to change the team's nickname.

The Washington Post reports that the letter, signed by Rep. Tom Cole, R-Okla., and Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., asks Goodell to "to take a formal position in support of a name change."

The letter goes on to add that the league "is on the wrong side of history. It is not appropriate for this multibillion dollar… tax-exempt organization to perpetuate and profit from the continued degradation of tribes and Indian people," the Post reports. Cantwell is the chair of the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, while Cole is one of two Native Americans in Congress.

The Redskins franchise, which was founded in 1932 and has been based in Washington since 1937, has been under increasing pressure to change its name, which many deem offensive to Native Americans. Some newspapers have refused to use the team's nickname in stories and NBC commentator Bob Costas referred to the nickname as "an insult, a slur" during the network's broadcast of a Redskins game this past October.

Redskins owner Dan Snyder has insisted that he would never change the name while he owned the team. Team spokesman Tony Wylie responded to the letter in a statement to the Post: "With all the important issues Congress has to deal with ... don’t they have more important issues to worry about than a football team’s name? And given the fact that the name of Oklahoma means 'Red People' in Choctaw, this request is a little ironic."

For his part, Goodell has resisted calls to change the team's name. At a news conference during Super Bowl week, Goodell responded to a question about the name by saying, "Eight out of 10 Americans in the general population would not like us to change the name. So we are listening. We are being respectful to people who disagree. But let's not forget this is the name of a football team."

Whether you like the name or not what a private entity names their organization seems to me to be a matter of free speech. To use their positions as congressmen to "urge" that a private entity change their name seems to me to be a intrusion by the government to regulate the Redskins free speech rights.
Opposing the name as private citizens is one thing, but when they use the power of their office then it becomes a constitutional intrusion.

Wednesday, February 5, 2014

Actually they're probably not but it was certainly sad the way the voters in the state ignored his open borders,RINO tendencies in the last election and voted him back in again.
True to form he's doing everything he can possibly do to embarrass America and even his own RINO accomplices.

The outburst was so embarrassing that Senator Graham, also an advocate of U.S. military intervention in Syria, apologized for McCain’s disturbing outburst. “Graham actually apologized to the group for McCain’s behavior,” according to the source, who sat through the entire meeting. “It was truly unbelievable.”

Apparently to McCain being a "maverick" means advocating against Americas best interests. How can an outburst against Syrian Christian leaders because he wants to arm and support our enemies possibly be in the best interests of the people who elected him to office?

Tuesday, February 4, 2014

Don't this just make you want to go out and sign up for the Obamacare train wreck?
Nothing like bringing out the cute kitties and doggies to try and manipulate people into accepting the government take over of our privacy and healthcare.
Wonder what they'll come up with to make us feel better about the IRS intrusion into our private lives and bank accounts.